| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 43 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 96:32:50 |
| Calls: | 290 |
| Files: | 904 |
| Messages: | 76,426 |
On 9/6/2024 1:18 PM, -hh wrote:
On 9/6/24 11:03 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/2/2024 12:24 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-02 05:13, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems
to be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture"
app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two: >>>>>>
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference >>>>>> is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan,
print on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have
all-in-one wireless devices with document feed for scanning
multiple pages or can be used as a flatbed. My HP all-in-one
supports 1200 dpi scans, do you really need more or is it an issue
with the size of the scan bed?
As usual, you spout off as if your situation is teh ony one that
could be relevant.
1200dpi is certainly more than adequate for printed documents, but
only a complete ignoramus could be unaware of the fact that HH has
been taking many, many photographs for many, many years.
And while I'm suspect (I was going to right "sure" there, but unlike
you, I don't pretend to omniscience) that almost all the pictures he
takes today are taken digitally, it seems likely that he has at
least some pictures taken the old-fashioned way that he might want
to scan in digital form.
Except that in the statement above he says "I use it quite a bit w/
MacOS's "Image Capture" app, and documents to PDF." and
"Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF." This
indicates that he is more concerned about scanning documents, not
pictures.
As its primary use case, sure.
1200 dpi works for printed pictures unless you really want to blow
them up.
It depends on the original media & intended application, of course,
but I consider 1200 to be marginal and 1990s technology; I'd want a
flatbed to be capable of at least 4800, which matches an older Epson
scanner that can do transparencies ... I forget how long ago I got
that one but for carbon-dating purposes, it has a dual USB + Firewire
400 interface!
-hh
No idea why anything above 150-300 DPI is required for a PDF. I use
300/color for some documents and the output is readable, takes up a lot
less space than 1200, and scans much faster. 150 works for most of my documents. At 1200 the output is better but is 24x the size of the 300
scan.
I ran a 1200/color dpi scan on a document printed off the web, a
national parks map. Enlarged, that picked up the pixels from the original!
Enlighten me on what purpose 4800 dpi serves for scanning to a pdf.
Those files would be HUGE.
On 9/7/24 10:09 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/6/2024 1:18 PM, -hh wrote:
On 9/6/24 11:03 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/2/2024 12:24 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-02 05:13, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems >>>>>>> to be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" >>>>>>> app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two: >>>>>>>
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference >>>>>>> is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan, >>>>>> print on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have all-in- >>>>>> one wireless devices with document feed for scanning multiple
pages or can be used as a flatbed. My HP all-in-one supports 1200
dpi scans, do you really need more or is it an issue with the size >>>>>> of the scan bed?
As usual, you spout off as if your situation is teh ony one that
could be relevant.
1200dpi is certainly more than adequate for printed documents, but
only a complete ignoramus could be unaware of the fact that HH has
been taking many, many photographs for many, many years.
And while I'm suspect (I was going to right "sure" there, but
unlike you, I don't pretend to omniscience) that almost all the
pictures he takes today are taken digitally, it seems likely that
he has at least some pictures taken the old-fashioned way that he
might want to scan in digital form.
Except that in the statement above he says "I use it quite a bit w/
MacOS's "Image Capture" app, and documents to PDF." and
"Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF." This
indicates that he is more concerned about scanning documents, not
pictures.
As its primary use case, sure.
1200 dpi works for printed pictures unless you really want to blow
them up.
It depends on the original media & intended application, of course,
but I consider 1200 to be marginal and 1990s technology; I'd want a
flatbed to be capable of at least 4800, which matches an older Epson
scanner that can do transparencies ... I forget how long ago I got
that one but for carbon-dating purposes, it has a dual USB + Firewire
400 interface!
-hh
No idea why anything above 150-300 DPI is required for a PDF. I use
300/ color for some documents and the output is readable, takes up a
lot less space than 1200, and scans much faster. 150 works for most of
my documents. At 1200 the output is better but is 24x the size of the
300 scan.
I ran a 1200/color dpi scan on a document printed off the web, a
national parks map. Enlarged, that picked up the pixels from the
original!
Enlighten me on what purpose 4800 dpi serves for scanning to a pdf.
Those files would be HUGE.
Because I never said I'd be scanning documents to PDF at 4800.
Plus I've never said that PDFed documents are the _only_ use case.
What I've said is that for this, PDFing is the primary use case, and
that productivity factors & workflow siting discourages the clunky "all
in one" type of device.
I've already bought .. and retired .. scanners whose max resolutions
were 300dpi and 1200dpi and inadequate to workflow needs, so it isn't particularly logical to go backwards to another "max 1200dpi" scanner.
For planning purposes, the technical rule of thumb for sampling instrumentation is to sample at at least 4x the source. Applied here, a basic office printed doc used to be 300dpi, but 600dpi has become the standard, so full data capture requires at least 1200-2400dpi. Line art
is 1200dpi, which means 4800dpi+. For film, it varies from 1200-2400dpi
for a basic scan, to 6400dpi for high quality. Higher than that hits diminishing returns, which relates back to the analog silver nitrate
source, but even here depends on the grain of the original film: one
will typically have more available to be extracted from Kodachrome 25,
64 and Ektar 25 than from mainstream 400 ISO consumer grade stuff.
On 9/6/2024 1:18 PM, -hh wrote:
On 9/6/24 11:03 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/2/2024 12:24 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-02 05:13, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems
to be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture"
app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two: >>>>>>
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference >>>>>> is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan,
print on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have all-in-
one wireless devices with document feed for scanning multiple pages
or can be used as a flatbed. My HP all-in-one supports 1200 dpi
scans, do you really need more or is it an issue with the size of
the scan bed?
As usual, you spout off as if your situation is teh ony one that
could be relevant.
1200dpi is certainly more than adequate for printed documents, but
only a complete ignoramus could be unaware of the fact that HH has
been taking many, many photographs for many, many years.
And while I'm suspect (I was going to right "sure" there, but unlike
you, I don't pretend to omniscience) that almost all the pictures he
takes today are taken digitally, it seems likely that he has at
least some pictures taken the old-fashioned way that he might want
to scan in digital form.
Except that in the statement above he says "I use it quite a bit w/
MacOS's "Image Capture" app, and documents to PDF." and
"Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF." This
indicates that he is more concerned about scanning documents, not
pictures.
As its primary use case, sure.
1200 dpi works for printed pictures unless you really want to blow
them up.
It depends on the original media & intended application, of course,
but I consider 1200 to be marginal and 1990s technology; I'd want a
flatbed to be capable of at least 4800, which matches an older Epson
scanner that can do transparencies ... I forget how long ago I got
that one but for carbon-dating purposes, it has a dual USB + Firewire
400 interface!
-hh
No idea why anything above 150-300 DPI is required for a PDF. I use 300/ color for some documents and the output is readable, takes up a lot less space than 1200, and scans much faster. 150 works for most of my
documents. At 1200 the output is better but is 24x the size of the 300
scan.
I ran a 1200/color dpi scan on a document printed off the web, a
national parks map. Enlarged, that picked up the pixels from the original!
Enlighten me on what purpose 4800 dpi serves for scanning to a pdf.
Those files would be HUGE.
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to be
fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" app,
and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to be
fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" app,
and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is
negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan, print
on paper/photo, and fax?
Why USB? HP and others have all-in-one wireless
devices with document feed for scanning multiple pages or can be used as
a flatbed.
My HP all-in-one supports 1200 dpi scans, do you really need
more or is it an issue with the size of the scan bed?
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to be
fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" app,
and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is
negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan, print
on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have all-in-one wireless devices with document feed for scanning multiple pages or can be used as
a flatbed. My HP all-in-one supports 1200 dpi scans, do you really need
more or is it an issue with the size of the scan bed?
On 9/7/2024 11:05 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-07 07:09, Tom Elam wrote:Readable, and very much so. I scan FBO aircraft fuel receipts on a
On 9/6/2024 1:18 PM, -hh wrote:
On 9/6/24 11:03 AM, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/2/2024 12:24 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-02 05:13, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems >>>>>>>> to be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image
Capture" app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to >>>>>>>> two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x >>>>>>>>
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost
difference is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF. >>>>>>>>
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can
scan, print on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have >>>>>>> all-in-one wireless devices with document feed for scanning
multiple pages or can be used as a flatbed. My HP all-in-one
supports 1200 dpi scans, do you really need more or is it an
issue with the size of the scan bed?
As usual, you spout off as if your situation is teh ony one that
could be relevant.
1200dpi is certainly more than adequate for printed documents, but >>>>>> only a complete ignoramus could be unaware of the fact that HH has >>>>>> been taking many, many photographs for many, many years.
And while I'm suspect (I was going to right "sure" there, but
unlike you, I don't pretend to omniscience) that almost all the
pictures he takes today are taken digitally, it seems likely that
he has at least some pictures taken the old-fashioned way that he
might want to scan in digital form.
Except that in the statement above he says "I use it quite a bit w/
MacOS's "Image Capture" app, and documents to PDF." and
"Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF." This
indicates that he is more concerned about scanning documents, not
pictures.
As its primary use case, sure.
1200 dpi works for printed pictures unless you really want to blow
them up.
It depends on the original media & intended application, of course,
but I consider 1200 to be marginal and 1990s technology; I'd want a
flatbed to be capable of at least 4800, which matches an older Epson
scanner that can do transparencies ... I forget how long ago I got
that one but for carbon-dating purposes, it has a dual USB +
Firewire 400 interface!
-hh
No idea why anything above 150-300 DPI is required for a PDF. I use
300/color for some documents and the output is readable, takes up a
lot less space than 1200, and scans much faster. 150 works for most
of my documents. At 1200 the output is better but is 24x the size of
the 300 scan.
Are you kidding me? Is "readable" the highest level of your discernment.
"I have no idea why anyone needs to have anything to eat better than
McDonald's".
That explains a lot of your inability to see the issues with Windows:
You have no taste.
I ran a 1200/color dpi scan on a document printed off the web, a
national parks map. Enlarged, that picked up the pixels from the
original!
Enlighten me on what purpose 4800 dpi serves for scanning to a pdf.
Those files would be HUGE.
You are an idiot, Liarboy. Straight up an idiot.
Just because a scanner CAN do 4800dpi, doesn't mean you have to use
4800 dpi all the time.
weekly basis at 300 DPI and deposit scanned checks too. Never had an
issue, and 300 dpi is a lot faster than 600 or 1200. I do eat McDonald's fare, but tonight it was boneless rib-eye on the grill. Yummy.
On 9/2/2024 12:24 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-02 05:13, Tom Elam wrote:
On 9/1/2024 7:25 PM, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to
be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture"
app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is
negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
Why a single purpose scanner when for a little more your can scan,
print on paper/photo, and fax? Why USB? HP and others have all-in-one
wireless devices with document feed for scanning multiple pages or
can be used as a flatbed. My HP all-in-one supports 1200 dpi scans,
do you really need more or is it an issue with the size of the scan bed?
As usual, you spout off as if your situation is teh ony one that could
be relevant.
1200dpi is certainly more than adequate for printed documents, but
only a complete ignoramus could be unaware of the fact that HH has
been taking many, many photographs for many, many years.
And while I'm suspect (I was going to right "sure" there, but unlike
you, I don't pretend to omniscience) that almost all the pictures he
takes today are taken digitally, it seems likely that he has at least
some pictures taken the old-fashioned way that he might want to scan
in digital form.
Except that in the statement above he says "I use it quite a bit w/
MacOS's "Image Capture" app, and documents to PDF." and "Documentation
isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF." This indicates that he
is more concerned about scanning documents, not pictures.
1200 dpi works for printed pictures unless you really want to blow them up.
On 2024-09-01 16:25, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to be
fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" app,
and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is
negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
I did a little more digging for you, and I'm leaning towards the Canon because while both can scan PDFs from buttons on the front, the Canon
seems to have better support for multi-page PDFs.
You click to start a PDF scan, and then you can keep adding pages until
you click the "Stop" button.
PCMag seems to rate them both nearly the same (although the Epson was
the one they recommended in their composite "Best scanners of 2024), but
if you are planning to scan longer documents, it might make a simpler workflow.
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to be
fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture" app,
and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
On 9/6/24 4:21 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2024-09-01 16:25, -hh wrote:
Looking at replacing an old Canon 'CanoScan LiDE 110' that seems to
be fading away (bulb's going yellow).
Its USB connected; I use it quite a bit w/MacOS's "Image Capture"
app, and documents to PDF.
Looking around at equivalents, I think I've narrowed it down to two:
* Canon CanoScan LiDE 400
* Epson Perfection V39 II
It looks like both are currently supported in MacOS Sonoma 14.x
Any particular plus/minus or other observations? Cost difference is
negligible ($80 vs $90).
A couple of things that I've found:
* Epson is USB-2 (disappointing) & has separate power supply
* Canon claims USB-C but not which flavor/version thereof.
* Documentation isn't clear if the Epson supports scan-to-PDF.
Thoughts?
-hh
I did a little more digging for you, and I'm leaning towards the Canon
because while both can scan PDFs from buttons on the front, the Canon
seems to have better support for multi-page PDFs.
Well, OBE now because I picked up the Epson.
You click to start a PDF scan, and then you can keep adding pages
until you click the "Stop" button.
PCMag seems to rate them both nearly the same (although the Epson was
the one they recommended in their composite "Best scanners of 2024),
but if you are planning to scan longer documents, it might make a
simpler workflow.
Typically, the stuff I'm doing is a single page, with folding from being mailed. If there's a multi-page need, that's easy enough to combine
into a single file in MacOS Preview.